PERSONS SUBJECT TO THE PROHIBITION ON WEARING RELIGIOUS
SYMBOLS IN THE EXERCISE OF THEIR FUNCTIONS

(1) the President and Vice-Presidents of the National Assembly;

(2) administrative justices of the peace referred to in section 158 of the Courts
of Justice Act (chapter T-16), special clerks, clerks, deputy clerks, sheriffs and
deputy sheriffs referred to in sections 4 to 5 of that Act, clerks and deputy
clerks referred to in section 57 of the Act respecting municipal courts
(chapter C-72.01), and bankruptcy registrars;

(3) members or commissioners, as applicable, who exercise their functions
within the Comité de déontologie policière, the Commission d’accès à
l’information, the Commission de la fonction publique, the Commission de
protection du territoire agricole du Québec, the Commission des transports du
Québec, the Commission municipale du Québec, the Commission québécoise
des libérations conditionnelles, the Régie de l’énergie, the Régie des alcools,
des courses et des jeux, the Régie des marchés agricoles et alimentaires du
Québec, the Régie du bâtiment du Québec, the Régie du logement, the Financial
Markets Administrative Tribunal, the Administrative Tribunal of Québec or the
Administrative Labour Tribunal, as well as disciplinary council chairs who
exercise their functions within the Bureau des présidents des conseils de
discipline;

(4) commissioners appointed by the Government under the Act respecting
public inquiry commissions (chapter C-37), and lawyers or notaries acting for
such a commission;

(5) arbitrators appointed by the Minister of Labour whose name appears on a
list drawn up by that minister in accordance with the Labour Code (chapter C-27);
(6) the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, the Director of Criminal and
Penal Prosecutions, and persons who exercise the function of lawyer, notary
or criminal and penal prosecuting attorney and who are under the authority of
a government department, the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions,
the National Assembly, a person appointed or designated by the National
Assembly to an office under its authority or a body referred to in paragraph 3;

(7) persons who exercise the function of lawyer and are employed by a
prosecutor referred to in paragraph 2 or 3 of article 9 of the Code of Penal
Procedure (chapter C-25.1), unless the prosecutor is referred to in paragraph 6,
when those persons are acting in criminal or penal matters for such a prosecutor
before the courts or with third persons;

(8) lawyers or notaries acting before the courts or with third persons in
accordance with a legal services contract entered into with a minister, the
Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions, the National Assembly, a person
appointed or designated by the National Assembly to exercise a function under
its authority or a body referred to in paragraph 3, or lawyers acting in criminal
or penal matters before the courts or with third persons in accordance with a
legal services contract entered into with a prosecutor referred to in paragraph 7;

(9) peace officers who exercise their functions mainly in Québec; and

(10) principals, vice principals and teachers of educational institutions under
the jurisdiction of a school board established under the Education Act
(chapter I-13.3) or of the Commission scolaire du Littoral established by the
Act respecting the Commission scolaire du Littoral (1966-1967, chapter 125).

Also, it's important to recall that Bill 21 retains the ban, adopted (but not yet implemented) by the defeated Liberal government, against giving or receiving public services with one's face covered.

Thousands of protesters gathered in downtown Montreal on Sunday afternoon to protest the Quebec government's Bill 21 — proposed legislation that would ban some public employees from wearing symbols of their faith.

"Quebec is not France, long live the difference!" protesters chanted in French while clapping their hands and cheering.

Protesters gathered next to the Berri-UQAM Metro station before marching down René-Lévesque Boulevard.

Sunday's protest is the latest of several events organized since the bill was tabled in late March.

This latest scandal shows how divisive Bill 21 is, and how politicians are seeking to gain tactical advantages. I think Trudeau sees an opportunity here to pander to the over 70% of francophone Quebecers who (polls suggest) support the bill, while continuing to righteously oppose the bill himself.

A number of politicians have called for Steinberg to apologize in recent days, including Quebec Premier François Legault, Liberal MNA David Birnbaum, Montreal opposition leader Lionel Perez and Hampstead councillor Leon Elfassy.

Thanks for making that important point, lagatta (just before I was about to!).

Here's the problem with the crucifix thing. Removing the crucifix from the National Assembly (or, as Valérie Plante has already announced, from the Montréal municipal equivalent) is a cheap and easy way for Legault to say, "Ok, I've heard you, we mustn't be hypocrites, we're moving the cross, now remove your hijabs etc.!" That's why this is not IMHO the time to put any energy whatsoever on crucifixes in public institutions (the vast majority of which were removed during and after the Quiet Revolution anyway).

And suggestions that Québec is secretly still a Catholic society as an explanation for the motivation behind Bill 21 are wrongheaded - and it's the wrong way to fight this bill. The focus needs to be on freedom and equality.

This latest scandal shows how divisive Bill 21 is, and how politicians are seeking to gain tactical advantages. I think Trudeau sees an opportunity here to pander to the over 70% of francophone Quebecers who (polls suggest) support the bill, while continuing to righteously oppose the bill himself.

I'm just going to throw this out there, not as something I necessarily think is likely or desireable but something I could potentially see happening if Trudeau continues to struggle over SNC Lavelin and decides he needs to change the channel dramatically. I think that if Bill 21 passes the Liberals might disallow it.

Using a provision that hasn't been used in 75 years to block an overwhelmingly popular provincial bill would reinvigorate the moribund sovereignty movement, align every provincial premier against Ottawa, and be the death knell of Trudeau's government. That Bloc ad writes itself. Even I don't think Trudeau's quite that stupid.

But she says as much as she misses the Mediterranean lifestyle, for her, living in Tunisia had become untenable.

"I couldn't handle the changes in my country," she said, referring to what she describes as a steady progression of religious influence on society, the company where she worked, and even her own family.

Ben Ammar was raised by an atheist father and a mother who was a practising Muslim but didn't wear the veil … at least until recently.

"She saw that the neighbours wore it, her friends wore it, and said, 'I don't want to be the only one not wearing it,'" Ben Ammar said. "She didn't want to be different."...

Ben Ammar says the protest, organized by a group headed by controversial Imam Adil Charkaoui, does not represent the views of all of the province's Muslims.

"Who gave this association that organized the [protest] the right to talk in the name of Muslims here?" she said.

...

Zahra Boukersi's niece Louiza lost her husband, Abdelkrim Hassane, in the shooting.

Hassane was murdered by a gunman, along with five other Muslim men, because of his faith.

Still, Boukersi, who teaches French at Montreal-area private elementary school, does not see the CAQ's bill as fuelling Islamophobia, but as a necessary bulwark against what she calls "radical Islamization."

"I have students who see me as a role model," she said. "I'm not sure what kind of role model these [veiled] women will represent for the young generation."

Boukersi fears a replay of what she lived through in her native Algeria, where she says as a teacher, wearing a hijab went from a personal choice to a social imposition.

"We thought like you do here," she said. "That it's nothing at all, nothing at all. But no, it became a real nightmare.

Ultimately I come down on the side of people who want to cover themselves for whatever reason should be able to. I don't support it as a religious right.

There are lots of Catholic (and more generally Christian) place names in secular France, and I'm sure there are many Muslim ones in secular Tunisia. Tunisia and Turkey have very similar flags, combining revolutionary-secular red with the Muslim star and crescent.

Using a provision that hasn't been used in 75 years to block an overwhelmingly popular provincial bill would reinvigorate the moribund sovereignty movement, align every provincial premier against Ottawa, and be the death knell of Trudeau's government. That Bloc ad writes itself. Even I don't think Trudeau's quite that stupid.

I was thinking that a battle with the "separatists" against the backdrop of a constitutional crisis wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for the Liberals. Rather they might think it would be back to the good old days. Particularly with a Trudeau at the helm. But you're right that reviving disallowance might go too far. It would be an almost Trumpian move, although of course Trump himself would probably support Bill 21.

In the 90s, with a split right, the Bloc was the official opposition and the Liberals still had a strong majority government with a sweep of Ontario. Trudeau's behind in Ontario right now and can't afford any losses in Quebec (where he's the first Liberal since his father patriated the constitution to win a plurality of seats). They had a 35-year drought in francophone Quebec; I doubt Trudeau wants to roll the dice on another 35.

I think cco's view on this point is unassailable. Trudeau would love to change the channel. But not throw the TV set out the window and see whose head it hits. He needs his Québec seats and will do all he can to preserve them. I can only hope that incurably fickle Québec voters will turn to the left again (if the NDP even fits that category), and not to the the friends of the fascists. I hope. I'm not optimistic.

EDITED: And on a totally unrelated diversionary note: How's their daughter doing? Remember she faced some totally trumped-up "vandalism" charge after an occupation of some politician's office during the student strike? And something about some threatening graffiti (my memory is really fading here)... maybe to do with Ian Lafrenière?? I thought she showed great activist potential.

Immigrants and visible minorities are noticing how some of the most significant pieces of legislation introduced by the Coalition Avenir Quebec government since it took power last October have something in common: the bills disproportionately affect them.

Quebec's Bill 21, which bans some public sector employees including teachers and police officers from wearing religious symbols, has drawn widespread criticism since Minister of Immigration, Diversity and Inclusiveness Simon Jolin-Barrette tabled it last month.

The bill targets all religious symbols. But Haniyfa Scott, a teacher at Montreal's Carlyle Elementary School, says it is Muslim women who wear the hijab — as she does — who will feel it the most. "I'd like for the government to live a week in the shoes of all the people they are targeting," she said in an interview Monday.

While the secularism bill has grabbed a lot of attention, two other major pieces of legislation addressing immigration levels and the province's taxi industry have had outsized effects on the province's minority communities.

Transport Minister Francois Bonnardel's Bill 17, tabled last month, overhauls a taxi industry that is heavily composed of immigrants. Joseph Naufal, the director of a taxi company in east-end Montreal who also works for the industry association, said "easily 90 per cent" of Montreal taxi drivers are first- or second-generation immigrants.

The drivers say the Quebec bill, which abolishes a permit system, will drive many of them into bankruptcy.

quote:

Another bill affecting the immigrant community was tabled in February by Jolin-Barrette. Bill 9 creates a legal framework granting the government the authority to be more selective over who receives permanent residency in Quebec.

Shortly after introducing the bill, Jolin-Barrette signalled the government would throw out a backlog of 18,000 immigration applications from people around the world, including roughly 3,700 applications from people already residing in the province. The government told them to reapply under a new system.

Jolin-Barrette's plan was stopped on Feb. 25, when a Superior Court judge granted an injunction and ordered the government to resume processing the applications.

Steinberg's statement was dumb, but the amount of coverage its getting in the media is ridiculous. He's the mayor of a small town of 7,000 people and some in the francophone media are acting like he's the arbitor of all anglophone opinion and that all anglophones must denounce him or else they agree, nonstop outrage by the opinion collumnists both on french TV and papers. He's a nobody. No one outside of Hampstead had heard of him before this controvery and he'll go back to being a nobody after this controversy. The fact that Justin Trudeau is denouncing some small town mayor is comical.

EDITED: And on a totally unrelated diversionary note: How's their daughter doing? Remember she faced some totally trumped-up "vandalism" charge after an occupation of some politician's office during the student strike? And something about some threatening graffiti (my memory is really fading here)... maybe to do with Ian Lafrenière?? I thought she showed great activist potential.

Steinberg's statement was dumb, but the amount of coverage its getting in the media is ridiculous. He's the mayor of a small town of 7,000 people and some in the francophone media are acting like he's the arbitor of all anglophone opinion and that all anglophones must denounce him or else they agree, nonstop outrage by the opinion collumnists both on french TV and papers. He's a nobody. No one outside of Hampstead had heard of him before this controvery and he'll go back to being a nobody after this controversy. The fact that Justin Trudeau is denouncing some small town mayor is comical.

And that's also why I said this yesterday, when posting the Steinberg story:

Quote:

This latest scandal shows how divisive Bill 21 is, and how politicians are seeking to gain tactical advantages. I think Trudeau sees an opportunity here to pander to the over 70% of francophone Quebecers who (polls suggest) support the bill, while continuing to righteously oppose the bill himself.

You could make a similar statement about Legault and every other actor who is looking to benefit from scandals and division to gain some political points.

I'm going to give Mayor Steinberg some credit now. He has achieved what many thought impossible. He has managed to unite everyone, on all sides of the Bill 21 debate!

Trudeau isn't touching this with a 10 foot pole. Unfortunately the majority of the population here in Québec are from the regions. Montreal hasn't voted for a Conservative candidate (they may have won one, my mind's a sieve) since 1988. This city is very progressive next to the rest of the province. I don't think there is anyone in Ottawa that will side one way or another besides the BQ. The people have chosen and they chose CAQ. It's going to get worse.

Unfortunately the majority of the population here in Québec are from the regions. Montreal hasn't voted for a Conservative candidate (they may have won one, my mind's a sieve) since 1988. This city is very progressive next to the rest of the province.

The regions voted pretty massively for the NDP less than 10 years ago, and QS has started to get a toehold there, as well. It's not as simple as urban progressives vs. rural conservatives. (Not to mention a great deal of that CAQ support came from Montreal's suburbs and Quebec City, neither of which are really "the regions" as the term's popularly used.)

Unfortunately the majority of the population here in Québec are from the regions. Montreal hasn't voted for a Conservative candidate (they may have won one, my mind's a sieve) since 1988. This city is very progressive next to the rest of the province.

The regions voted pretty massively for the NDP less than 10 years ago, and QS has started to get a toehold there, as well. It's not as simple as urban progressives vs. rural conservatives. (Not to mention a great deal of that CAQ support came from Montreal's suburbs and Quebec City, neither of which are really "the regions" as the term's popularly used.)

The Conservatives do very well in exurban areas. In BC the right owns the Fraser Valley, mind you, it used to be referred to as the Bible Belt. IMO middle class Canada on a whole is a very conservative class. Mid to upper income areas are not a good pond for the left to be fishing for votes in. Especially if they are surrounded by farmers.

Unfortunately the majority of the population here in Québec are from the regions. Montreal hasn't voted for a Conservative candidate (they may have won one, my mind's a sieve) since 1988. This city is very progressive next to the rest of the province.

The regions voted pretty massively for the NDP less than 10 years ago, and QS has started to get a toehold there, as well. It's not as simple as urban progressives vs. rural conservatives. (Not to mention a great deal of that CAQ support came from Montreal's suburbs and Quebec City, neither of which are really "the regions" as the term's popularly used.)

Pardon the misinformation I was ignorant to the fact. OK. Quebec City and the off island. My point was that Montreal hasn't voted Conservative since 1988 I think CAQ won a couple seats on the Island, I truly don't remember but Montreal is pretty progressive when you size them up against QC and the surrounding towns and suburbs. No?

Boy Alan you sure are dismissive. Voters in Alberta are as nuanced as voters in any province. If all Albertan's voted like Edmonton Notley would be cruising to an easy majority.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to be dismissive of a whole populace. I always thought the University of Calgary belted out hardcore right wingers like a cookie cutter. What"s worse is this is the era of that Orange Lunatic south of the border. North America will soon be one huge right wing orgy....but I digress

I'm sorry I'm not trying to be dismissive of a whole populace. I always thought the University of Calgary belted out hardcore right wingers like a cookie cutter. What"s worse is this is the era of that Orange Lunatic south of the border. North America will soon be one huge right wing orgy....but I digress

Calgary versus Edmonton Quebec City Versus Montreal. Please catch up with the picture. I agree that U of C is flush with oil money and its "intellectual" output shows it. But as far as negative influence on Canadian politics it can't hold a candle to the Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf.

Boy Alan you sure are dismissive. Voters in Alberta are as nuanced as voters in any province. If all Albertan's voted like Edmonton Notley would be cruising to an easy majority.

Well, to be precise, if they voted the way Edmontonians voted in 2015. Between 1986 and 2012, the Edmonton vote swung all over the map, though at least in the latter election, the Tories carried the city because people wanted to block the even more right-wing Wildrose.

Overall, yes, it's a bit of a stretch to equate "right-wing values"" with "Alberta values". Pretty sure the people who elected Mike Harris and the Ford brothers weren't checking to see how Albertans voted before they cast their ballots.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to be dismissive of a whole populace. I always thought the University of Calgary belted out hardcore right wingers like a cookie cutter. What"s worse is this is the era of that Orange Lunatic south of the border. North America will soon be one huge right wing orgy....but I digress

Calgary versus Edmonton Quebec City Versus Montreal. Please catch up with the picture. I agree that U of C is flush with oil money and its "intellectual" output shows it. But as far as negative influence on Canadian politics it can't hold a candle to the Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf.

And you can check out who published Tom Flanagan's book on aboriginal affairs...

Boy Alan you sure are dismissive. Voters in Alberta are as nuanced as voters in any province. If all Albertan's voted like Edmonton Notley would be cruising to an easy majority.

Well, to be precise, if they voted the way Edmontonians voted in 2015. Between 1986 and 2012, the Edmonton vote swung all over the map, though at least in the latter election, the Tories carried the city because people wanted to block the even more right-wing Wildrose.

Overall, yes, it's a bit of a stretch to equate "right-wing values"" with "Alberta values". Pretty sure the people who elected Mike Harris and the Ford brothers weren't checking to see how Albertans voted before they cast their ballots.

I apologize for the generalization. Ontario is what is.They vote usually for simplistic messaging as Ford Nation..It's like Leafs Nation. I bet most of Ford's support were drunk af . No platform? and he was a step up from that degenerate Faith Goldy. If only Faith Nation were to take off in popularity,eh?

To be fair I think Quebecers are deeply influenced messaging as well. That's why we have Legault. Because he was the most appealing of the bunch (Couillard and Lisëe) But this place, if only with the help of the surrounding towns and cities and yes..the regions, QS can at least make up an Opposition and put to rest the Liberals and PQ.. CAQ would give QS a run for their money.though.

My point was that Montreal hasn't voted Conservative since 1988 I think CAQ won a couple seats on the Island, I truly don't remember but Montreal is pretty progressive when you size them up against QC and the surrounding towns and suburbs. No?

I'm not certain the terms have much meaning in the Quebec political context. The PQ and PLQ have both been moving rightward since the 80s, so one could just as easily say Montreal (with the exception of the Plateau) hasn't voted for the provincial left in decades. Plante's the first left-wing mayor in the time I've lived here. The West Island feels like any car-loving Tory suburb in Ontario to me (see the kind of stuff The Suburban publishes). They vote Liberal out of generations of animosity to the PQ and the French language in general (note Steinberg, as lagatta pointed out, doesn't speak French at all).

It's not like the Equality Party was anything other than reactionary, or Westmount's some kind of socialist enclave. Is VSL more "progressive" than Hochelaga? As measured how? Union membership? Community acceptance of LGBTQ? Feminism? And all that's without even getting into the bizarre alliances the secularism debate has made, to the point where some on the left here appear to believe secularism is progressive when it's against Catholicism and xenophobic when it's against any other religion, and where CIJA's twisting itself into knots to avoid the fact it's marching with Adil Charkaoui. Try finding a progressive between those two.

cco, the swath of Central-East Montréal that votes for the left is considerably broader than the Plateau. I live in Petite-Italie, which is part of Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie, and we are QS, NDP and Projet Montréal North of us in Villeray, QS and Projet Montréal lead, but we have not managed to dispose of the Liberal bulwark in Parc-Extension. QS also has an MNA in Hochelaga-Maisonneuve.

Off-island vs Montreal doesn’t work either. Sherbrooke has a QS and a federal NDP representative. The point of the island of Montreal is represented by CAQ and Mario Beaulieu. QS polls higher in “the regions” than in Quebec RMR. Big climate protests happen in “the regions” too, they just don’t make it into Montreal media reports.

I agree with you about the Equality Party It was a stain on the province that will never be cleaned. And I have had the misfortune of once reading The Suburban, It"s a rag.

It's not like the Equality Party was anything other than reactionary, or Westmount's some kind of socialist enclave. Is VSL more "progressive" than Hochelaga? As measured how? Union membership? Community acceptance of LGBTQ? Feminism? And all that's without even getting into the bizarre alliances the secularism debate has made, to the point where some on the left here appear to believe secularism is progressive when it's against Catholicism and xenophobic when it's against any other religion, and where CIJA's twisting itself into knots to avoid the fact it's marching with Adil Charkaoui. Try finding a progressive between those two.

Good on him, And relax and take a breath.. I appreciate your input. Is this organation prgressive? If not,why is he bothering with them?

cco, the swath of Central-East Montréal that votes for the left is considerably broader than the Plateau. I live in Petite-Italie, which is part of Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie, and we are QS, NDP and Projet Montréal North of us in Villeray, QS and Projet Montréal lead, but we have not managed to dispose of the Liberal bulwark in Parc-Extension. QS also has an MNA in Hochelaga-Maisonneuve.

CAQ surpassed the PQ because they dropped the sovereignist thing. Legault is still a sovereignist he just dropped it as a party goal so he could beat the Liberals. The Liberals and CAQ will now trade power back and forth indefinitely probably even under PR if we get it.

One of Justin Trudeau's most important jobs is standing up for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, if he doesn't have the backbone to stand up for our rights then he should resign.

What specific action are you recommending that Trudeau take - assuming Bill 21 passes as is, including the notwithstanding clause?

A motion in the Canadian parliament denouncing Bill 21 is a start. Not much Trudeau can do legislatively, but he can attack the law using the platform his position provides him and I believe its his responsibility to do so.

One of Justin Trudeau's most important jobs is standing up for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, if he doesn't have the backbone to stand up for our rights then he should resign.

What specific action are you recommending that Trudeau take - assuming Bill 21 passes as is, including the notwithstanding clause?

A motion in the Canadian parliament denouncing Bill 21 is a start. Not much Trudeau can do legislatively, but he can attack the law using the platform his position provides him and I believe its his responsibility to do so.

Ok, thanks. I thought there might have been some possible concrete measure I missed. Trudeau has already made negative comments about Bill 21, as have other party leaders. Any party can make that motion in the House - none has. I'm not sure why such a motion would require "backbone" and whether you really are suggesting Trudeau should resign if he doesn't introduce it? But that's fine.

I'll be honest with you. Meaningful opposition to Bill 21 can only come from the people of Québec. Anything else is just noise which will, at best, have a negative effect here. Once the notwithstanding clause is invoked, this becomes a matter of purely provincial jurisdiction. Wish us well!

I disagree, as it stands while there have been some high profile francophones that have denounced this law (Valérie Plante, QS MNAs) there has been no significant protest against this law from Francophones (especially outside Montreal). All the protests have been from the populations who will be effected and anglo/allophones and pledges to not apply the law have been almost exclusively from anglo municipalities and institutions.

The CAQ doesn't give a damn what non francophones and religious minorities have to say and from what I can see the francophone media are mocking the protests counting the English signs (as if the fact that the signs are in English makes them illegitimate.)

The only chance of stopping or even watering down this bill is for Quebec to become an international pariah because of this bill and a denounciation from Parliament will help this story get picked up a lot more in the international press (as will a hopeful hearing at the United Nations Human Rights Committee.)

I'll be honest with you. Meaningful opposition to Bill 21 can only come from the people of Québec. Anything else is just noise which will, at best, have a negative effect here. Once the notwithstanding clause is invoked, this becomes a matter of purely provincial jurisdiction. Wish us well!

I disagree, as it stands while there have been some high profile francophones that have denounced this law (Valérie Plante, QS MNAs) there has been no significant protest against this law from Francophones (especially outside Montreal).

I think we're talking past each other. I never said there HAS been huge protest within Québec. I said there HAS TO BE. We need to organize it.

Quote:

The only chance of stopping or even watering down this bill is for Quebec to become an international pariah because of this bill and a denounciation from Parliament will help this story get picked up a lot more in the international press (as will a hopeful hearing at the United Nations Human Rights Committee.)

You mean - Québec will become an "international pariah" like, say, France ? Or Turkey? Both of which ban hijabs in public schools and government buildings (and NOT JUST for public service employees)? I fear you are dreaming in what we used to call technicolour.

Respect for human rights, tolerance, diversity, will only come from within. If it doesn't come from there, it won't come from anywhere.

Pariah was a bit strong, but becoming an international embarrassment is the only thing that will stop this bill. I will continue attending the protests but no amount of protest from minorities and anglo/allophones will do anything. The CAQ doesn't care what we think, but at least the Liberal and PQ governments seemed to be really sensitive to being made fun of in the international press.

A stream of articles comparing Legault to Donald Trump, saying that Legault is banning certain religious minorities from certain jobs, something even Trump has never done, could shame enough people. Unlikely but you gotta have hope.